An interesting article by Bjorn Lomborg ($) in the Wall Street Journal today (search Google for the full-text). His article notes lots of interesting new facts and academic papers, and warns of the wider consequences of pandering to the media’s desire for shrill headline-grabbing alarmism on the environment.
Yet the same might also be said of the wilder elements among the nay-sayers. It seems to me that both sides of the debate are becoming far too slapdash in their public claims, and also in their childish personalised dismissals of good contrary evidence. The recent little spat over the La Victoria weather station in central-north Paraguay seems a case in point. Both sides leaped to their hasty conclusions and slipshod rebuttals without doing any historical research on the weather station in question. An hour spent trawling the online archives and histories would have shown them they were both treading on very shaky ground, and for a number of different reasons.